Originally Posted by
GUWonder
I wouldn’t be so sure about the above. AA can violate a reasonable expectation of privacy of passengers with what it does. And since AA doesn’t have the immunity protections that a government organization may have, AA, for its own financial interests, should have a policy that responds to the risks of having employees being so eager to data dump one or more passengers’ info/circumstances into the hands of whatever lazy LEO comes by on a wild goose chase to try to snare someone.
AA, as a private actor, cannot violate a reasonable expectation of privacy at all. One has a reasonable expectation of privacy, in the constitutional sense, only against state actors, and AA ain't one. Thus AA can be sued for negligence perhaps but not for having a poor privacy policy.
Originally Posted by
SpaceCoastBill
The thing is with FOJ warrants, nobody would go off an identification provided by an airline. Fingerprints would be requested from the original agency, as well as photos. That along with identification items such as a drivers license, and other items with him that had his identity on it would be used.
Ive seen it where the priginal agency could provide nothing other than a name and DOB, and the person has no ID.
We would print them and run it through the system and see if it matched, but other than that the person would be released.
Not doubting your experience but TX warrants don't require all of this to issue -- and not all receiving states undertake such a thorough obligation to vet an out-of-state FOJ warrant. There certainly is no constitutional obligation for them to do so.